Adrian Gonzalez entered 2013 providing hope for the first base position that the Dodgers haven’t had since James Loney‘s strong push to end 2007. After the late-season trade that sent Adrian from the Boston Red Sox to Los Angeles — and a solid but unspectacular end to the season, offensively — there was hope that another off-season away from his shoulder surgery could bring back a bit of the old San Diego A-Gon.

Gonzalez was better in 2013 than he was in his short time here in 2012, but he was basically the same guy this year that he was when you look at his 2012 as a whole. He hit .293/.342/.461/.803 with a .346 wOBA and 124 wRC+. He compiled 54 extra-base hits, whiffed in just 16% of his plate appearances, and played in 157 games while dealing with a sore neck at the beginning of the year and quad issues at the end of the year.

That said, age and the serious shoulder injury he suffered a couple years back are to blame for his seemingly overlooked decline. Yes, Adrian is still more than capable of carrying the offense at any given time, but he’s nowhere near the player he once was. He was just the 13th most valuable first baseman in baseball from an offensive standpoint, behind guys like Brandon Moss, Adam Lind, Brandon Belt, and Eric Hosmer. Gonzalez’s OBP and SLG have dropped each of the last three years as well, but most shocking is the continued lack of free passes Adrian has been drawing. After a pair of campaigns in which he drew walks in over 13% of his trips to the dish (including a 17.5% mark in 2009, aided by the San Diego Padres‘ roster), Adrian has fallen below 7.3% in both 2012 and 2013.

Defensively, Adrian saved roughly five runs with his glove in ’13 and is still a threat to win a Gold Glove in any given year. Unfortunately, he gives a lot of that back by being one of the slowest players in the league, and he’s near the bottom of the MLB in terms of baserunning.

With five years and $106 million remaining on his contract, simply being better than Loney and friends doesn’t make up for the fact that a player who was once a 4.5-6.5 WAR guy is just no longer that dude anymore. Fortunately, the Dodgers can afford to overpay a bit, but the latter years of his contract are looking bleak. He’ll deservedly get a lot of credit for his .833 OPS in the NLDS and 1.091 OPS in the NLCS, and there’s reason to believe he can stave off a steep decline, but I have to acknowledge that the decline exists. Doing otherwise would just be avoiding the facts.

I was torn on what positional review to include Michael Young in, but then it struck me that whichever one I chose would be a position he couldn’t defend to save his life, so I settled on first base. I’m going to keep this short because Young’s Dodger tenure can be described fairly succinctly with a simple tweet from Paul Boyé following Game 1 of the NLCS against the St. Louis Cardinals:

Michael Young's -.527 WPA is the 6th lowest ever for a postseason game

Young hit .314/.321/.392/.713 with a wOBA of .309 and a .340 BABIP in the regular season after being traded to Los Angeles, but his defense and baserunning meant he was worth -0.2 WAR during that time. Regardless, he was basically acquired to be a pinch hitter in the postseason. And … well … in 10 postseason plate appearances — while consistently being selected over Scott Van Slyke, even against lefties — that line fell to a gritty and classy .100/.100/.100/.200 with a .089 wOBA. Oh, and that one hit? An infield single in which the pitcher missed the base.

Swell.

Fun Fact

Who started the second-most games at first base for the Blue Crew in 2013, with a grand total of seven?

Wainwright, if you remember, blamed white towels as the reason for Matt Holliday taking a James Loney fliner off the dick back in the 2009 NLDS, so he has a history of complaining about completely asinine crap. Also worth mentioning that the Cardinals hand out the same white towels at home now during the playoffs, which makes all this even better.

“As a player, he doesn’t know. He doesn’t know. I think he doesn’t know,” Beltran said. “He still thinks he’s playing somewhere else, I don’t know. He has a lot of passion, no doubt about that. Great ability, great talent, and I think with time he will learn that you have to sometimes act a little bit more calm. Not only with trying to show up other teams, [but also], like, umpires. It’s going to take him time, but he’s going to learn.

“When you try to do those things, you get attention. You don’t want to wake up nobody. I always say that if you hit a homer off a pitcher, you have to make him believe that he made a mistake. You don’t wake him up, because next time the pitcher is going to be more focused with you and is going to try to get you out, try to be more aggressive. As a player, he will learn. I don’t think he’s a bad kid, I just think he doesn’t know right now.”

In my opinion, Puig’s greatest offense wasn’t his celebration, but the fact that he allowed Beltran’s horrid misplay on his triple to not be a potential inside-the-park homer. Naturally, Beltran didn’t see it that way, because it’s of the utmost importance to police the opposing team’s screwups.

So that’s basically the issue at hand and it’s naturally being pumped up by the media for maximum pageviews and handwringing.

I make this point all the time, but sports is entertainment, and if you take it that way you stop being so offended over things as silly as celebrating. And honestly, I think you stop taking stuff that goes on within that arena so personally, in general. Besides, if you’re going to get mad about something, do it over something worthwhile, like pointless beanball wars and brawls, not guys having fun.

I just have trouble with understanding the logic and reasoning of people who look to sports as some kind of moral compass for how we as a society and culture should act. If you’re relying on sports for that, then it seems to me there are more pressing issues with your life and decision making than why some dude on TV is happy and you’re not.

2. If you’re gonna talk the talk and concern troll others then you better walk the walk.

Why do all the concern trolls end up doing similar stuff themselves but thinking their shit doesn’t stink?

- Joe Kelly fist pump, screams, and turns to scream at Puig … in the first frame of the SERIES.

Puig is immature but he walks away after a guy strikes him out and yells at him, angry at himself, doesn't whine like a child to the media.

- Beltran doing a similar celebration as A-Gon that gets cut short by TV.

- Carlos Martinez bouncing off the mound, pounding his glove a bunch, and praising his deity.

- Yadier Molina screaming after an out, pumping his fist, and pounding the dirt.

- Cardinals celebrating like they won the World Series, complete with Gatorade bath and fireworks … after winning Game 1.

- Matt Carpenter leading off Game 2 with a triple then fist pumping, screaming, and clapping towards his dugout.

- Michael Wacha bounding off the mound, half-fist pump, and skips all the way to dugout.

Where’s the fun police on all this? And it doesn’t even count the “typical” reactions of screaming and clapping and Yadi fist pumps basically every inning. You don’t see A.J. Ellis doing that, so should I whine or something? That’s how it works, right?

Bleh.

Do I think there’s anything wrong with the stuff pictured above? Nah. I never even came close to complaining about any of it while it happened either. But the point is that if the Cardinals are gonna high-horse and lord over everybody, then they better act up to their lofty standards themselves or enforce it on their own teammates to start.

3. So where exactly is the line between offensive/over the top and gritty/gamery? You tell me. No, really … tell me.

If that’s not the case, and what the Cardinals do is somehow different than what Puig and A-Gon did, then what are the guidelines exactly? Either spell it out or stop whining.

His flair comes through mainly in his tendency to celebrate hits like his triple Monday with the kind of outward jubilation that the American baseball establishment frowns on.

In many Latin American countries, Puig’s antics would hardly separate him from his peers. “In Cuba, you always see a lot of emotion on the field,” Puig said through an interpreter. In the United States, that kind of emotion generates grumpy, passive-aggressive responses like the one Cardinals manager Mike Matheny had when asked about Puig’s reaction to the triple. “Guys are going to handle successes and failures however they’re going to handle them,” Matheny said.

The game would be better off if more players handled success like Puig, or at the very least, felt like they were free to do so. It’s supposed to be fun. It’s supposed to be entertaining. Somewhere along the line, U.S. baseball players became the most sensitive athletes in all of sports. Clap once after a hit, and they’ll tolerate it. Clap twice, and you’re showing them up, an offense punishable by a fastball off your leg the next time you come to the plate.

Exactly. It’s an arbitrary, constantly moving line and completely pointless.

—–

So where do I stand on it? The whole thing is relatively simple to me.

I dunno. If you're celebrating yourself, pumping up teammates, or pumping up fans, it's all fair game to me. Just don't taunt people.

Taunting usually directly incites fighting/violence, which is something the sport should try to avoid. Of course, reacting to taunting with violence is illogical in itself, but not everybody is Brandon McCarthy:

When discussing 'pimping' homers it's best to remember the phrase "who cares?"

Regardless, that’s just my two cents. And as McCarthy, Kevin Towers, and Miguel Montero have shown, people can’t even agree on team-wide guidelines, much less league-wide ones. Others will have different limits, and I understand that. But that’s the point, it’s all subjective and I just can’t see the reason behind getting so flustered over what somebody else does in regards to their own interests.

Personally, I tend to internalize my struggles and look in the mirror for faults first, though I’m aware that others apparently dedicate their lives to meddling in the business of others because it helps distract them from their own personal failings. After all, it’s much easier to blame the happy dude for being happy than face the reality that you’ve come up short due to your own faults. To me, that says far more about them than it does the person having fun, and it ironically paints a picture of an insecure and immature individual who can’t handle another person’s joy.

Andre Ethier is growing rather sick and tired of questions regarding his inability to hit left-handed pitchers and whether or not he’s going to be platooned, and he recently stated that the difference between people nagging him about it and not is an extra five hits a year.

It was only one at-bat, and it was only spring training. But it was Andre Ethier’s first at-bat of spring training against a left-handed pitcher, so naturally it commanded a lot of attention.

Ethier stroked an opposite-field triple in the fourth inning Saturday against Chicago White Sox southpaw Leyson Septimo. He finished the exhibition opener 1-for-2, and after the game cautioned against making too much out of a small sample size.

“(If I) get five extra hits in the year, you guys aren’t going to talk to me about it,” Ethier said. “It’s that simple.”

Well … yeah, that would help, but it’s not like five hits a year in this context is a minor improvement or a tiny adjustment or something.

Over his seven-year career, Ethier has had 1010 at-bats against southpaws, which is about 144 per year. So he’s asking for five hits per 144 at-bats, which is ridiculous.

To put that into perspective, the much-maligned James Loney has 3170 at-bats over the exact same seven years. Giving him five hits for every 144 at-bats results in 110 additional hits, and his career batting average jumps from .282 to .317 and his career OPS goes from .758 to around .830. That turns him from a punch-line into an above-average regular.

Keep that fact in mind going forward, because even giving Ethier the free hits he thinks would help him avoid criticism, I don’t think it would help as much as he thinks. Add 35 hits to his numbers against lefties over those seven years and you get a career line that goes from .238/.296/.352/.649 to .272/.328/.389/.717, which isn’t exactly stellar considering the league-average OPS from 2006 to 2012 was .743.

Point being, his batting average would be solid enough, but that doesn’t address the walk rate (10.8%/6.2%), strikeout rate (15.3%/21.4%), nor power (.215 ISO/.115 ISO). So even granting him five hits against lefties every year, which is just silly, I’m gonna guess people would still ask questions about a ~.200 OPS difference in split. Like fans/media wouldn’t ask why he goes from Josh Hamilton to Juan Uribe based on the handedness of the pitcher?

Look, I can imagine it’s frustrating for Ethier to hear the same questions over and over again, and I get that it’s not his fault that Don Mattingly and friends refuse to platoon him. However, for $85 million, people tend to want more than a guy who just crushes righties, and the reality for now is that he’s an excellent platoon guy masquerading as an everyday regular, five annually gifted hits or not.

Yes, this is the final installment of the 2012 Season Review for the Dodgers, and if you want to catch up on the others, then you can check out this tag here.

Otherwise, in the tables listed below, I have calculated the WAR (along with its components), value, and surplus value of every player on the Dodgers payroll in 2012.

It’s not meant to be taken literally (“A.J. Ellis is a better player than Matt Kemp!“), but I always learn stuff about the team that I hadn’t previously realized when I do it.

—–

The three best players on the Dodgers, according to WAR, were A.J. Ellis, Matt Kemp, and Andre Ethier, in order. The most valuable players, according to surplus value, were A.J. Ellis, Luis Cruz, and Mark Ellis.

The three worst players on the Dodgers, according to WAR, were Gordon, Juan Rivera, and Alex Castellanos. The least valuable players, according to surplus value (excluding dead money), were Juan Uribe, James Loney, and Rivera.

In related news, did you realize the Dodgers are STILL paying Juan Pierre? Good grief.

The three best pitchers on the Dodgers, according to WAR, were Clayton Kershaw, Chad Billingsley, and Chris Capuano, in order. The most valuable pitchers, according to surplus value, were Kershaw, Kenley Jansen, and Capuano.

The three worst pitchers on the Dodgers, according to WAR, were John Ely, Matt Guerrier, and Mike MacDougal. The least valuable players, according to surplus value (excluding dead money), were Ted Lilly, Guerrier, and Ely.

In related news, you can see why the Dodgers want to upgrade their rotation, as the team defense was decidedly average, but the staff RA WAR outperformed their FIP WAR by six wins.

The Dodgers are shopping Dee Gordon in trades, according to Peter Gammons of the MLB Network. The 24-year-old Gordon figures to draw significant interest given the dearth of shortstops available via free agency.

As I said earlier, it’ll be interesting to see how exactly teams perceive him and what his value is.

Personally, I couldn’t accept him as the centerpiece in any significant deal, especially for somebody like, say, James Shields.

—–

The Rayshave signed former Dodger first baseman James Loney to a one-year deal.

Free agent first baseman James Loney has agreed to a one-year, $2 million contract with the Tampa Bay Rays pending a physical exam, said a baseball source.

The deal will pay Loney an additional $1 million if he reaches specified performance bonuses, the source said.

I guess that’s actually not a terrible deal. I mean, expectations are basically zilch at that point.

When the Dodgers acquired Adrian Gonzalez from the Boston Red Sox, I saw a plethora of Dodger fans begin to assert wild and crazy things. Not only were the Dodgers guaranteed of making the playoffs, but they were a lock to make the World Series on the back of a hero who was absolutely the right acquisition because of the dubious logic of him fitting in with the community and what not.

With all of the variables in baseball, I found these claims to be ridiculous. Putting aside the unforeseen injuries to Matt Kemp, Chad Billingsley, and Kenley Jansen, Gonzalez’s acquisition did not portend to an immediate success because of the small sample size of the remaining season and because it wasn’t really the same A-Gon of pre-2012.

No, this A-Gon was potentially still dealing with ramifications from shoulder and back injuries, had seen his power sapped, and had seemingly forgotten how to draw a walk (10.6% career, 10.3% in 2011, 6.1% in 2012). While an obvious upgrade over James Loney‘s corpse, success was no sure thing, as he was in the midst of his worst professional season since becoming a full-time starter. What would end up disappointing people in 2012 was two-fold: far too high expectations and a stretch in which Gonzalez was atrocious at the plate, to the tune of a .235/.292/.346/.638 line over a 20-game span.

Following an MVP-caliber 2011 in which he hit .338/.410/.548/.958 with a .407 wOBA, .210 ISO, 154 wRC+, and 75 extra-base hits, A-Gon’s slash line fell to .299/.344/.463/.807 with a .346 wOBA, .164 ISO, 115 wRC+, and 66 extra-base hits. Again, those numbers still trump anything his predecessor in Blue could dream of, and his numbers after the trade still stand above Loney’s, but will they be enough in the long-run for such a high-priced player? It’s yet to be seen.

On the positive side, Gonzalez was still a very productive player, no doubt, saving ~15.5 runs with his excellent glove and posting a WAR of ~3.4. Also, Adrian did finish strong, mashing to the tune of a .330/.365/.495/.860 line. As he won’t even turn 31 until May, I expect Gonzalez to rebound and be better with the lumber, ending up closer to a ~4 WAR player, at least for a season or two.

Prior to his trade to Red Sox Nation, Loney was having yet another putrid season, hitting .254/.302/.344/.646 with a .278 wOBA and .090 ISO. Even his most ardent fans were less boisterous about how the #RBIMachine would bust out at any moment, and though the financial ramifications of the Boston deal worry me, and the deal as a whole doesn’t thrill me, I was very pleased to see the Sox take him away.

Loney leaves Los Angeles as a failed prospect who could never hit enough to warrant his job at a premium offensive position. The only real role in baseball that he has left is as a late-inning defensive replacement, as he saved ~3.3 runs in 2012 prior to his move east.

Rivera was the right-handed half of the #Fail platoon Don Mattingly trotted out at first prior to Gonzalez’s arrival. He started 39 games and appeared in 54 at first, hitting just .226/.268/.404/.672 while being a liability on the basepaths (-1.4 BsR) and with a first baseman’s glove (-17.6 UZR/150 in over 300 innings). He managed to land in that rarefied air of posting a negative fWAR, clocking in at -0.8 for the year.

How he could possibly receive anything other than a minor-league invitation to Spring Training in 2013 from any team is beyond me, but if anyone can make that theoretical minor-league deal into a guaranteed major-league one, it would be Uncle Ned.

The Dodgers have announced that all members of the 2012 coaching staff will return in 2013 with the lone exception being hitting coach Dave Hansen, whom the club has parted ways with after he spent just over a season in the position. While it’s true that this squad was fairly terrible offensively for most of the season, I can’t and won’t pin the blame on Hansen. Primarily because I don’t believe a hitting coach has that much of an effect on the hitting performance of a team as a whole.

Teams that can hit end up doing so because they have talented offensive players, which the club lacked for much of the year. As they later showed, the early offensive outburst was a mirage, and the reinforcements arrived too late to make an adequate judgement on how a hitting coach may have affected their performance.

Factor in the multiple injuries suffered by Matt Kemp, the late arrivals of upgrades Hanley Ramirez and Adrian Gonzalez, and the light-hitting/atrocious players Ned Colletti chose to have on the team to begin with – Dee Gordon, James Loney, Juan Rivera, to name a few – and the poor offensive showing was really to be expected.

Hansen is an easy scapegoat for the team’s struggles, but the concern should be fielding a team of talented offensive players who walk, hit for power, and run the bases effectively, and hopefully those players manage to stay healthy over the course of the season. The blame for the struggles of the Dodgers goes a lot deeper than the hitting coach, and it’s always rather pathetic when they get the ax for the failings of others.

]]>http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/10/dodgers-fire-hitting-coach-dave-hansen-because-they-needed-a-scapegoat/feed/0Anatomy Of An Offensive Meltdown: Andre Ethier, Mark Ellis, And Six James Loneyshttp://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/09/anatomy-of-an-offensive-meltdown-andre-ethier-mark-ellis-and-six-james-loneys/
http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/09/anatomy-of-an-offensive-meltdown-andre-ethier-mark-ellis-and-six-james-loneys/#commentsTue, 18 Sep 2012 13:36:30 +0000http://www.chadmoriyama.com/?p=10847
Since the execution of The Trade on August 25th, the Dodgers have gone from scoring 4.0 runs per game to 3.1 runs per game. What was already a mediocre offense in the bottom third of the league has scored the second fewest runs in all of baseball since the start of September.

Adrian Gonzalez was supposed to be the impact difference maker for the team, but he has undoubtedly struggled thus far. Still though, that belies the fact that even if he were hitting as expected, the Dodgers offensive woes would hardly be magically solved.

Since August 25th

Quite frankly, it’s almost impressive to see how much of a true team effort this collapse has been, with almost every starter contributing to the mess. It’s basically been Andre Ethier starring, Mark Ellis being solid, and then six James Loney types or worse.

Out of the bunch, the two players that surprised me the most were Luis Cruz and A.J. Ellis. Despite the heroics of the former, even he hasn’t been hitting all that well of late, and the latter hasn’t been doing much either, despite always appearing to give reliable plate appearances.

As a team, over the last 21 games (in which they’ve gone 8-13), the Dodgers are hitting .233/.302/.354/.656. With a line like that, it’s amazing that they’re even putting up as many runs as they are.

—–

So where does that leave them going forward for the last two to three weeks of the 2012 season? Well, as a team, they’ve been unlucky recently, and that’s reflected in their projected statistics for the remainder of 2012.

Projected Over Remainder Of 2012

The offense actually projects quite well the rest of the way.

Only M. Ellis and Cruz see a negative regression in BABIP (Shane Victorino remains the same), whereas every other player gets a rather significant bump. Matt Kemp has the largest jump, but his poor performance is probably fueled by his triple threat of injuries more than luck. That aside though, the fact remains that this is a lineup much more talented than what they’re currently showing. Since I don’t believe their inability to “jell” has been having an adverse affect on their performance*, something eventually HAS to click, right?

The numbers say so, let’s just hope it works out that way.

*By all accounts, every player is happier with their situation after the trades than before the trades (besides Victorino), including the players already on the Dodgers. Speculation aside from that is just trying to play armchair psychologist.

So how am I feeling about it today? I think Gonzalez is going to be an incredible fit in LA, especially considering that reports of his demise in Boston seem overblown (he was outstanding last year and has been very good for much of this year after a slow start) and that he never seemed to want to leave Southern California in the first place. It’s a high price to pay, but if he is what we think he is – and don’t forget, there was little available in the first base market next year, so if you’re spending money, this is how you do it – and the team becomes a consistent contender, I think it’ll be a price we can live with.

And if not? The next decade could get ugly, fast. For now, I’m cautiously optimistic, but mainly excited for the rest of the season.

I’m the same. Hopeful, but wary for reasons that I believe are legitimate. Far too many Dodgers fans pretending this is highway robbery in our favor, in my opinion.

The chances of De La Rosa becoming one of the greatest pitchers of all time might be slim, but De La Rosa doesn’t have to become the second Pedro to represent a major loss for the Dodgers. He could just be really good, while Gonzalez apes DeShields’ decline.

Like I said, I’m hungry for a World Series title, and I’m not saying the risk of trading De La Rosa won’t be worth it. Don’t misunderstand me: The Dodgers need a player like Gonzalez, who boosts them at their weakest position. I even believe that a move back to his Southern California roots and away from the Red Sox maelstrom could revitalize him.

All I’m saying is, short of Clayton Kershaw, the trade of any other pitcher besides De La Rosa would have left me more comfortable.

Not sure I agree with the people flipping out on him, especially if the Dodgers can’t upgrade their rotation significantly in the coming years. However, I think Adrian Gonzalez is a far better player and Rubby De La Rosa, while one of my favorites, won’t get to ace level.

Sports Illustrated: Jay Jaffe acknowledges the risk and the reward, saying that if nothing else it makes the season compelling.

All in all, it’s a dizzying deal that could affect not only the outcome of this year’s NL playoff races, but also could turn the Dodgers into the NL West’s powerhouse for years to come, with an enviable middle of the order starring Kemp, Gonzalez, Ramirez and Ethier. Or it could blow up in the team’s collective face, saddling the Dodgers with unproductive players signed to long-term deals, and hampering their roster flexibility much as it did these Red Sox.

Given their surrender of two top young arms, and the massive savings — and saving face — that the deal offered Boston, the Dodgers should have come away with far more than $12 million in salary discounts. That they didn’t puts virtually all of the risk on them, but it makes for a compellingly aggressive play in a playoff race that remains wide open.

True Blue LA: Eric Stephen notes that the team is headed for the luxury tax.

If the Dodgers can add $260 million to their payroll in one trade — and close to a half-billion dollars in four months — is there a limit to their spending?

“Somewhere, I suppose,” Chairman Mark Walter said Saturday.

And where might that limit be?

“I haven’t found it yet,” President Stan Kasten said. “I’ll let you know when we get there.”

Not sure how much of that is rhetoric, but I think we’ll see in the 2013 off-season.

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron thinks it doesn’t make sense from a baseball perspective but that it might make sense if the Dodgers make a deep run into the playoffs due to financials.

From a purely baseball standpoint, this investment doesn’t make sense. Gonzalez isn’t valuable enough to make him worth taking on the albatross contracts of Crawford and Beckett, and the Dodgers almost certainly could have gotten a better bang for their buck in free agency this winter. However, making moves this winter won’t get people interested in the Dodgers in the same way that a deep playoff run this year will.

I’m getting a lot of similar comments on Twitter, so I know this isn’t a rare opinion, but I have to wonder how legitimate the train of thought is. Dodgers fans show up regardless of how the team is doing, and the only reason attendance plummeted last year was because of a fan boycott of Frank McCourt. Even with all the turmoil, they were sixth in attendance last year, and this year they’re already back up to third. As such, I don’t buy the argument that they needed to do this during the season to make the playoffs otherwise fans wouldn’t come back and they wouldn’t make money. If the tens of millions from potential playoff revenue is going to make or break a team with billions of dollars looming, then there are bigger problems here.

Also, I don’t buy that this is to create buzz for a media deal. We’re all speculating, but logically I don’t see why cable companies, who negotiate deals like this all the time, would be swayed off their valuation due to a small sample size and not take into account the big 15-to-25 year picture. It’s already rumored to be in the $8 billion range, so how much higher could it go? Maybe they are that dumb, I dunno, but it seems iffy to assume so.

There’s no getting around the fact that the Dodgers likely just paid $20 for a gallon of milk. Given the prices everyone else is paying for milk, that seems pretty silly. If you happen to have lots of $20 bills and no milk, however, and there’s only one guy selling milk in your immediate vicinity, maybe you just complain about price gouging and hand over the $20. Depending on just how many $20s the Dodgers ownership has, this might not end up being quite as nuts as it looks on the surface.

Or, maybe I’m just over-thinking all of this, and the Dodgers just made a horrible, horrible trade. I’m honestly not sure.

Maybe, but I can’t see this trade destroying the team down the road. It might make for an inferior roster, but as long as they continue to spend, the team will be competitive. I’d just rather have to go through as little big money decline phases as possible.

ESPN: Buster Olney names his winners and losers … with the Dodgers on both.

Winners: The Dodgers of 2012

They are markedly better today than they were before this deal. Adrian Gonzalez is perfect for their lineup, their lineup balance, their defense and their ballpark, and he knows the division from his many years with the Padres. Beckett might be energized, and he gets to shift out of one of the best-hitting divisions to one of the worst.

Winners: Magic Johnson, Stan Kasten and the rest of the Dodgers’ ownership group

In less than four months, these owners have managed to completely rebrand the franchise, and, even if the Dodgers don’t make the playoffs this year, they’ve set themselves up for a major bounce forward in attendance and interest and team success in 2013. The city might throw them a parade even if they don’t win the World Series because, ding-dong, the Frank McCourt era is over.

Losers: The Dodgers of 2017

The team’s stunning spending spree feels good today, but Los Angeles has set itself up to have a roster loaded with aging stars in about five years — Matt Kemp, Gonzalez, Crawford and Andre Ethier all have contracts that run through that season. By then, the Dodgers’ farm system should be replenished, and the club’s ownership should have the resources to pave over that type of problem in the way the Yankees have — and, in any event, Dodgers fans won’t have to worry about that for a while.

This deal could end up looking good for both sides, better for the Dodgers in the very short term but much better for the Red Sox in the long term. Boston enters this winter with a new financial lease on life, freeing the Sox up to spend in a weak free-agent market or perhaps to take on a large contract someone else would like to move (Cliff Lee? Justin Upton?).

They’re also looking at a pretty interesting group of position-player prospects racing up the system, led by Xander Bogaerts, who has improved his defense at shortstop this year and might defy earlier expectations and stay at the position. That potential for an inexpensive core should help Boston avoid a similar tangle of large contracts in the near future, just at a point when the Dodgers are facing a financial quagmire and roster crunch of their own.

Baseball executives are chiming in on the trade, basically questioning what the Dodgers are doing.

Rival exec on #Dodgers: “If you had $250M to spend, is this how you’d do it?”

The Dodgersfinalized a trade today that will send Rubby De La Rosa, Allen Webster, Jerry Sands, James Loney, and Ivan De Jesus to the Red Sox for Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, Nick Punto, and Cash.

The Dodgers are paying ~$130 million for six years and a month of his services. Accounting for inflation over the course of the contract, every win will come out to ~$5 million, so the Dodgers are paying for about 26 WAR or 4.2 WAR per year.

Will he be worth it? I’m quite confident he will be, despite issues that others have concerns about.

In 2011 with the Red Sox, he hit .338/.410/.548/.957, posting a ~6.5 WAR season. He got off to a slow start in 2012, however, and thus only has a .300/.343/.469/.812 line. However, he has come on of late, and he projects to finish the year on a .301/.369/.504/.873 tear, so I don’t think he’s at the start of a precipitous decline. The primary concern is that his career 10.7 BB% has dipped to 5.9%, and it will need to rebound for him to live up to his usual standard. With that said, his batting projection puts his OPS around .860 or so, which presumes a gain in walk rate.

His fielding has never been in doubt, as he is a plus defender across all advanced metrics and I don’t think anybody would argue with it. He does lack foot speed though, which is why his baserunning total comes in low.

That’s not to say there’s minimal risk though, which makes sense, since he wouldn’t have been let go otherwise. He’s in his age-30 season right now, and aging curves tell us that he’s likely to regress over the course of his contract, as the mid-30s are generally the danger area. On the upside, I don’t see a reason to be concerned about injuries, as he has never played in less than 156 games in a full season.

Factoring everything above, A-Gon comes out to about a 5 WAR player, and he figures to be worth around 27 WAR after accounting for age regression. While he won’t be providing much surplus value beyond what he’s being paid by the Dodgers, he should be well worth the acquisition, especially considering the barren first base market and the lack of internal options. The A-Gon part of this deal is cause of excitement.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Carl Crawford

The Dodgers are paying ~$105 million for five years and a month of his services. Accounting for inflation over the course of the contract, every win will come out to ~$5 million, so the Dodgers are paying for about 21 WAR or 4.1 WAR per year.

Unlike A-Gon, where I have trouble seeing how he’s not worth it, I have trouble seeing how Crawford will even get anywhere close to worth it.

For the past two seasons, Crawford has been … uh … a mess. He’s been worth a total of around 0.5 WAR, which needless to say doesn’t bode well for his 4.1 WAR goal. Even if you completely believe that his skills are intact, his body throws a sizable wrench into the equation to say the least, and it doesn’t help then that he may miss a few months of next season. He was projected to post a .283/.323/.446/.769 line for the rest of 2012, which is quite generous since his actual line has been .260/.292/.419/.711 for 2011 and 2012. For the projection, I put him around a .780 OPS, which is almost what he posted in his last few years with the Rays.

On the basepaths, despite his basestealing ability, he’s never been a plus baserunner, but he does clock in on the positive side of the ledger due to his speed. His defense will probably generate the biggest debate, as it was once a plus tool, but it has since regressed to average at best across the advanced metrics due to injury or whatever else. Personally though, I think he should benefit from the bigger spaces in Dodger Stadium, so he should return to form. However, it would be dishonest to just grant him plus status after two clear years of regression, so I made him just good instead of elite.

Like Gonzalez, Crawford is in his age-30 season and will regress over the course of his contract, including the dreaded mid-30s. Unlike Gonzalez, there’s ample reason to worry about Crawford’s health, and his projected playing time reflects that, clocking in at ~550 plate appearances.

Factoring everything above, Crawford comes out to about a 2.9 WAR player, and he figures to be worth around 12 WAR after accounting for age regression.

So he should be worth a bit more than half his contract, and when that contract totals in excess of $100 million that burns quite a bit. Unlike at first base, the options in the outfield, either short-term or long-term, to get better value were plentiful. Therefore, I can’t see how anybody would be excited about taking him on. The “he’s better than Juan Rivera” argument only works for this year because the Dodgers would have options in the offseason, and since Crawford won’t be playing this year there’s really no defense for this. I’m assuming a lot in his favor as it is, and if he’s right he should be a decent player for the team until late in the deal, but he certainly won’t be worth what the Dodgers are paying him unless lighting strikes.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Josh Beckett

The Dodgers are paying ~$35 million for two years and a month of his services. Accounting for inflation over the course of the contract, every win will come out to ~$4.75 million, so the Dodgers are paying for about 7.5 WAR or 3.5 WAR per year.

I’m actually more confident that Crawford will make meaningful contributions than Beckett for reasons that go beyond statistics, so needless to say, I’m skeptical about him earning his keep.

In 2012, Beckett has a 5.23 ERA, 4.27 FIP, 4.39 xFIP, and 4.28 SIERA. That’s about the profile of Bud Norris of the Astros at the moment … if Norris was set to make $16 million annually.

The reason I only mention 2012 is this report by Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:

Goldstein says that Beckett’s 70 fastball has turned into a 55/60. His once-biting curve has lost a similar amount of stuff: Goldstein reports that he would be “leery” of putting a 60 rating on it and might call it a 50-plus. His cutter, he explains, is at best a 40. Given how often he throws it, the cutter could be something of an Achilles’ heel for Beckett going forward.

Goldstein is not terribly optimistic about Beckett’s performance going forward and grades him as a no. 4 or no. 5 starter going forward.

That scouting report is backed by fastball velocity that has dropped from 93.8 MPH for his career to 91.6 MPH, and a strikeout rate that has gone from a career 22.2% to 17.2%. I’m not sure how anybody could reasonably expect him to bounce back to 4-5 WAR levels with that profile.

Like Gonzalez and Crawford, Beckett isn’t young. He’s in his age-32 season, is showing signs of decline, and is under contract into his mid-30s. There’s reason to worry about injury too, as he missed significant time (60-day DL) two years ago with a back strain and was placed on the DL for shoulder inflammation this year. Since he’ll likely only get to ~160 innings this year, I think giving him ~175 is generous enough.

Factoring everything above, Beckett comes out to about a 2.1 WAR player, and he figures to be worth around 4 WAR after accounting for age regression.

Like Crawford, he projects to be worth a bit more than half what he’s being paid, but it burns a lot less because it’s only a two year commitment after 2012. Of course, there’s opportunity cost here as well, because there’s always bargain options that can provide 1.5 to 2.5 WAR for a lot less than what Beckett will be paid, as Chris Capuano and the likes have proven. I suppose there’s upside hidden deep in Beckett’s profile in that maybe he regains his stuff, but I can’t bet on it due to his age. Besides, both his numbers and the scouting match each other, and that’s usually a recipe for accuracy. Hope for the best, but I wouldn’t expect anything better than a #4 starter.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Nick Punto

The Dodgers are paying ~$2 million for one year and a month of his services. Accounting for inflation over the course of the contract, every win will come out to ~$4.5 million, so the Dodgers are paying for about 0.5 WAR or 0.4 WAR per year.

Don’t think I need a table for this one, as it’s purely to give the Dodgers a utility guy, I believe. Punto is at .200/.301/.272/.573 for 2012 and is projected to hit .229/.327/.271/.598 the rest of the way, which matches his age profile and career hitting ability. He’s above average on the bases and can play second, third, and short, where he grades out as a plus defender at every position.

His value on the bench is contingent on the Dodgers finding guys that can hit because he’s purely a defensive replacement or a spot starter. Still, he’s a solid utility guy because of his defense and versatility. He’ll be serviceable, which is all he’s being paid for, so it should be fine.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Rubby De La Rosa

As a starter last year, he posted a 3.71 ERA/3.87 FIP/3.55 xFIP/3.85 SIERA with a 23.6 K% and a 12.2 BB% before succumbing to Tommy John surgery. After rehabbing for a year, he’s back and so is the velocity, so it seems the only thing lost was a year of development. Regardless, he has plus velocity and two potential swing-and-miss off-speed pitches in the change and slider. He’s rotation quality right now, and with command improvement, I don’t see why he couldn’t be a #2 or #3 rotation option.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Allen Webster

After being demoted to the bullpen early in 2012, he may now be every bit the prospect that Rubby or Zach Lee is for the reasons Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus details here:

“It’s all there,” said a National League scout who was taken off his coverage to see the team. “When everything is going, he has three average-to-plus pitches and knows what to do with them.” The scout noted that Webster’s game has matured, as well. “He knows he has a really good—and potentially special—changeup, but he’s not over-relying on it anymore,” the scout explained. “It’s like he finally figured out that setting that pitch up with 92-94 mph heat is the best way to go about it, and his curveball has improved as well. He used to get over the ball and it wouldn’t finish, but now it’s breaking through the zone much better.”

His ceiling seems to be in the #2 range as well, with #3 to #4 a more likely destination. He should test the waters at the MLB level this year, and could be ready in 2013.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Jerry Sands

For his career, his line at AAA Albuquerque is .291/.363/.557/.921 … but it’s Albuquerque. Still, I like his chances of becoming a major league contributor, though I’m not sure he’ll be worthy of holding down a left field spot for a team like the Red Sox. There’s a shot he becomes a regular, but I see him as more of a platoon guy or temporary starter as opposed to a long-term fit there.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

Ivan De Jesus

A .301/.354/.416/.770 line at Albuquerque paired with his .231/.282/.277/.559 career line with the Dodgers doesn’t bode well for him. Furthermore, while he can play second, short, and third, he’s only above average at second, so I’m not sure he even fits as a utility guy.

Reaction GIF Analysis

—–

James Loney

He’s been worth 0 to -1 WAR this season while making $6.5 million and he’s a free agent to be. Bye.

Reaction GIF Analysis

=====

So the Dodgers are paying ~$272 million to get the four mentioned players from the Red Sox, and the Red Sox will be kicking in about ~$12 million back to the Dodgers. So the team is paying for ~55 WAR of production, but is getting about ~43 WAR in value (~$212 million). As such, just by taking on the contracts alone, they figure to be looking at a surplus value around -$50 million. Then factor in the two top prospects, one solid prospect, a fringe prospect, and the corpse of James Loney, and you’re looking at quite a deficit to overcome, especially if any of them develop and hit their ceilings.

On the other hand, this undoubtedly makes the Dodgers better in the short-term, perhaps by as much as 7 or 8 wins in 2013. It should solidify the squad as a playoff favorite for this year and the next two years, perhaps even longer than that, depending on the decline phases of Crawford/Gonzalez.

While I understand that fans are excited by the prospects of that immediate improvement, I just have to wonder whether the Dodgers couldn’t do better if given ~$260 million to spend and the prospect package in question. Of the players received, only Adrian Gonzalez really fills a hole that couldn’t have been addressed in either 2013 or 2014. Then there’s the potential problems with payroll flexibility and the luxury tax that I’ve mentioned before. Also, as you can see through Jay Jaffe‘s work here, they’re really hemmed up in the short-term payroll-wise, and they now have $90 million sewn up in four players through 2017, which unfortunately doesn’t even include Clayton Kershaw yet.

As such, fans should surely enjoy the ride this year and in the immediate future, but it’s easy to justify significant concern over the long-term future of the roster, as all the risk in this deal is being taken by the Dodgers.

I’ll have a more detailed update on this trade later on tomorrow, but as of right now, I’m floored, honestly.

—–

My first impression though is to say that the trade isn’t for the better of the Dodgers overall. Yes, it makes them a better team immediately, but they likely now have limited financial flexibility for years to come. Ironically, that’s the reason the Red Sox did this deal to begin with.

Additionally, the Dodgers are sending two top prospects to the Red Sox, both of which could contribute soon, in Rubby and Webster. Sands is certainly not a regular at this point, but he’s ready to try now, and he could develop into one. De Jesus could be a decent utility guy and Loney is whatever.

—–

The contract obligations the Dodgers are assuming total in excess of $250 million AFTER this year is over, and the team is giving up two of their best prospects and another solid one, so unless the cash coming back is significant, then this probably leaves the team better off in the short-term but worse off in the long-term.

Surely this drastically makes the team better now, but it also sets the Dodgers up to have an old, injury prone, and expensive roster going forward. I sure hope the Dodgers win now, because if they don’t, it could get ugly in a hurry.

]]>http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/08/dodgers-reportedly-acquire-a-gon-beckett-crawford-and-punto-for-rubby-webster-sands-loney-de-jesus-cash/feed/0Dodgers Designate Tony Gwynn Jr. To Clear Room For Jerry Sands, But Did They Get Rid Of The Wrong Guy?http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/08/dodgers-designate-tony-gwynn-jr-to-clear-room-for-jerry-sands-but-did-they-get-rid-of-the-wrong-guy/
http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2012/08/dodgers-designate-tony-gwynn-jr-to-clear-room-for-jerry-sands-but-did-they-get-rid-of-the-wrong-guy/#commentsMon, 06 Aug 2012 17:06:56 +0000http://www.chadmoriyama.com/?p=8584

The Dodgers announced moments ago that Jerry Sands would be getting the call from AAA and that Tony Gwynn Jr. has been designated for assignment.

Sands has done his part to deserve the shot, hitting .286/.368/.521/.889 at AAA, including a BABIP around league average. He’s hitting lefties and righties about equally well, so putting him down as a platoon guy seems a bit asinine, and unlike last year, when he posted a 1.153 OPS at Albuquerque and a .659 OPS away, this year he’s at .964 and .826, respectively.

It’s also worth noting that even if you don’t believe Sands will be a regular in the future, he has put up a .248/.329/.381/.710 line in his MLB career, which puts him 60 points higher than James Loney and Juan Rivera in 2012.

That fact happens to be exactly what I don’t understand about getting rid of Gwynn though.

Mike Petriellodoesn’t mind ditching Gwynn because he doesn’t think Gwynn has any utility left for the team. While that’s true, I’m not quite sure what utility the others have either.

Designate plus-plus defender and fourth outfielder, keep two mediocre 1B who are only useful in a platoon and all around useless 3B.

I guess my argument is less that the team needs Gwynn and more that it needs Rivera, Loney, Juan Uribe, and Adam Kennedy less.

Gwynn’s .232/.276/.293/.570 line is terrible, without a doubt, but he’s still a plus-plus defender that’s better than anybody in the Dodgers outfield by a long shot. The type of player he is has value as a pinch runner, as a defensive replacement, and as an emergency starter — even if they can’t hit.

What utility do Loney, Rivera, Uribe, and Kennedy have? To me, they aren’t even useful off the bench as a pinch hitter (maybe Rivera).

Tony Gwynn Jr.: career .305/.372/.405 hitter in 147 PA as pinch-hitter. Between that and defense, should have been kept instead of Uribe

Regardless, it’s hard to get worked up about it, as we’re likely talking about 50-75 PA for Gwynn and whatever amount of defensive replacement appearances he would have got, but I just disagree that moving Gwynn instead of one of the other four was in the best interests of the Dodgers roster.

On Sunday, the Dodgersreportedly pulled out of a deal that would see Carlos Lee in a Dodger uniform and prospect Garrett Gould shipped off to the Astros.

The Dodgers, who entered Sunday with a seven-game losing streak, have pulled out of talks for the Astros’ Carlos Lee, according to baseball sources.

Rumors of a deal for Lee began Friday night and on Saturday it was announced that a trade was in place for pitching prospect Garrett Gould.

However, Lee spent the weekend mulling whether he would accept the trade or not and he had not made a decision by Sunday.

“If they don’t want to be here, then I don’t want them” Dodgers manager Don Mattingly said on Saturday.

As I said at the time, I didn’t get why the Dodgers were interested in that deal anyway, as it made no sense to me.

No loss there, in my opinion.

—–

So what now? Well, how about Derrek Lee?

“OH MY GOD, YOU GODDAMN IDIOT, YOU JUST SAID NO TO CARLOS LEE AND NOW YOU WANT DERREK LEE, LOLOL, WHAT A DUMMY!”

Right?

Not exactly. It’s not that I think he’s the savior, but if the Dodgers want to take a flier on an old first baseman, I don’t see why Derrek Lee isn’t a better option than Carlos Lee for a few reasons.

1) He only costs money.

There’s no asset to give away for Derrek, as he’s a free agent. Whatever you think of Gould, he’s obviously a usable asset, which I don’t think should’ve been on the table for what amounted to basically a lateral move and a prayer.

2) He might be better with the bat than Carlos.

Derrek hit .267/.325/.446/.771 last season and projection systems ranged from .756 to .826 for 2012. Carlos hit .275/.342/.446/.788 last season and projection systems ranged from .739 to .788 for 2012.

The upside with Derrek seems to be higher because of a presumed bounce back in walk rate and the fact that his power hasn’t completely left him yet, despite his diminishing ability to square up the ball consistently.

3) He’s a better defender than Carlos.

While similarly old, Derrek has always been athletic and a solid defender. Therefore, unlike Carlos, he shouldn’t be much of a drop-off in that area from James Loney.

—–

While neither are likely to carry a team for half a season, there are legitimate reasons that Derrek Lee is more likely to contribute than Carlos Lee. Most importantly though, the cost of acquiring the former is just money.

It’s no secret that the Dodgers are desperate for help. Offense has been the primary problem of late, as the team is now feeling the effects of missing cogs like Matt Kemp, Andre Ethier, and Mark Ellis. However, Ned Colletti has been looking to shore up pitching as well.

As of the last couple of days though, seemingly as a result of the recent losing streak, talks have intensified everywhere, and the Dodgers are apparently trying to find upgrades wherever they can get them.

—–

A prime example of their current mindset is Buster Olneylisting basically everybody as potential trade targets for the Dodgers. He mentions Jeff Francouer, Alfonso Soriano, Chase Headley, Edwin Encarnacion, Vernon Wells, Carlos Lee, Justin Morneau, Bryan LaHair, Hanley Ramirez, Daniel Murphy, and “Boston Red Sox leftovers“. I wouldn’t waste too much time thinking about scenarios for most of those names, as it’s just speculation, but it gives you a general idea of what the team is looking at.

Dodgers have scouted Bryan LaHair, and like other teams, they have concerns about defense. Maybe that won’t matter, because they need help.

Ken Rosenthal‘s recent reports provide another example, as he reveals the Dodgers have been in touch with at least eight teams about a variety of positions.

According to major league sources, they have talked multiple times to the Cubs, Astros, and Brewers. They’ve also touched base with a number of other teams, including the Mariners, Royals, Twins, Blue Jays and Padres, sources said. The Dodgers would like to add a hitter, a starting pitcher, and a left-handed reliever.

So the Dodgers are contacting everybody in an effort to improve the squad, not just the offense, but also the rotation and bullpen.

Speaking of the Cubs, the Dodgers are viewed as a favorite to land Ryan Dempster once he returns from the disabled list, sources suggest to Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com. The two sides haven’t talked since the week before Dempster went down but a person familiar with the situation says Los Angeles has a very good chance to land the right-hander.

The Dodgers are lukewarm to the idea of signing Derrek Lee, and would prefer to explore other options first, a major league source told Rosenthal. Lee would require time at Triple-A and the Dodgers seem to prefer more certainty and perhaps a more immediate solution at first base.

Would take the Lee interest with a grain of salt, but the Dodgers are clearly looking for just about anybody who is alive and can play first base at this point.

—–

So with that established, the hot button issue at the moment are the rumors involving Zach Lee, Garrett Gould, Jed Lowrie, and Carlos Lee.

9:02pm: The Dodgers are talking to the Astros about a trade that would send Jed Lowrie to the Dodgers with minor-leaguers Zach Lee and Garrett Gould headed to Houston, according to Buster Olney of ESPN.com (via Twitter). One source place the odds of the deal taking place at about 50-50 right now, Olney tweets.

I understood the interest in Lowrie, as Dee Gordon has been a black hole, both offensively and defensively, but Carlos is a marginal upgrade at best, if he even is one.

10:11pm: The Dodgers asked about Lowrie, but he’s now not in the current talks, tweets Buster Olney of ESPN.com. A source says that there’s a 50-50 shot that Carlos Lee accepts a deal to Los Angeles for pitching prospects.

This is where I got negative. With Lowrie out of the picture, it’s Carlos for “pitching prospects”, plural.

9:57pm: Dodgers‬’ talks with ‪Astros‬ involve Carlos Lee, not Jed Lowrie, according to Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports (via Twitter). Lee would need to a approve deal and has the right to block a deal to the Dodgers.

As I was expressing on Twitter, I’m not thrilled with the idea of trading prospects for Carlos Lee. A solid segment of fans disagreed though, as they were generally enamored with acquiring an upgrade over James Loney. I’m just not sure Carlos Lee is the guy they’re looking for.

Carlos Lee’s current slash line is .290/.342/.412/.754, which is in line with his recent production, and he projects to hit .276/.328/.434/.762 the rest of the way. Additionally, consider that he’s a terrible defender in the outfield and a fringe to poor defender at first base.

James Loney’s current line is .236/.303/.323/.626, which is partially the result of lower than normal BABIP. He projects to hit .266/.327/.387/.714 the rest of the way. Plus, he plays above-average to plus defense at first.

Now 50 points difference in OPS is nothing to scoff at, but factor in the defense and then consider that Loney has a .802 OPS career against righties (.669 against lefties) and Juan Rivera has a .821 career OPS against lefties (.747 against righties). Now the gap is basically non-existent.

You know how to tell that this trade is an iffy upgrade? When it’s even arguable as to whether a potential acquisition is an improvement over James Loney and Juan Rivera.

Then there’s the matter of the prospects involved, but I already gave my thoughts on that through Twitter.

My problem isn’t the prospects involved as much as it is getting players who are decent in return, which Ned has trouble doing.

It’s not so much about the prospects, it’s about giving away legitimate assets for questionable upgrades.

Some people are happy to give away prospects for immediate upgrades, no matter how small, but why give away prospects for basically no reason? Throwing shit against the wall may work in small sample sizes, but do it enough and you’ll get burned more often than not.

The Dodgers lost their best player on Monday night as Matt Kemp was placed on the disabled list with a left hamstring strain. The news was pretty much expected since before the game, when manager Don Mattingly, Kemp, and the training staff had a lengthy meeting with Dr. Neal ElAttrache about Kemp’s MRI results, which confirmed a left hamstring strain.

“It’s a mild strain, but the doctor said if you do it again, it can go from a grade one to a grade two, and then you’re talking four weeks,” Mattingly said. “Now he has a chance to get healthy, and make sure he doesn’t have any long-term effects from this thing.”

While this is a blow, I think most can agree it’s better for him to get healthy now than to risk wrecking himself, as he admitted that it was affecting his play.

He admitted he’s been playing at half-speed since injuring the leg last Saturday in Chicago. He reinjured it trying to leg out a ground ball Sunday and was removed from the game.

“I’ve been a little scared to do certain things,” he said. “I felt it in there a little bit. I just wanted to help my team any way possible, but I was babying it a little. I came to that realization.”

Perhaps the best part about all of this is that Andre Ethier may see time in center field.

Gwynn will be the primary center fielder with Kemp on the shelf, which Mattingly doesn’t think will be more than 15 days. But Mattingly also wants to make sure Gwynn doesn’t get overused, and said he would use Andre Ethier in center field for “two or three games” with Kemp out.

Yikes.

As an alternative though, why can’t Jerry Sands and Scott Van Slyke play first base? The defense is a downgrade, but James Loney still isn’t hitting.

I think Don Mattingly is probably the best manager the Dodgers have had since Tommy Lasorda, but his management of yesterday’s game against the Giants exposed what is probably his most glaring weakness.

—–

In the bottom of the seventh inning, with the Dodgers down one run, the team basically hit the lottery by somehow managing to get Juan Rivera and James Loney to not make outs.

That brought up Juan Uribe in what was clearly a traditional sacrifice situation, especially considering that Uribe sucks. However, while he does have 60 sacrifice bunts in his career over 5121 plate appearances, he’s had only one sacrifice bunt in the last three seasons over the course of 941 plate appearances. As such, it’s safe to say that he’s not exactly accustomed to bunting.

Uribe executing a successful sacrifice is anything but a foregone conclusion, then you add that you’re actually lessening your chances of scoring runs by bunting, and it’s just an overall terrible decision.

Mattingly though, of course, called for the bunt anyway, and it worked out SPLENDIDLY.

Then, IN THE VERY NEXT INNING, the Dodgers were put in the exact same situation after a Bobby Abreu walk and a Dee Gordon bunt single. With Mark Ellis coming up and Matt Kemp on deck, Mattingly elected to bunt with Ellis, effectively setting things up perfectly for the Giants to avoid pitching to Kemp.

Ellis was a fine option to bunt, as he has executed 12 of them in his previous three seasons, but even so, it again lessened the Dodgers chances of scoring runs.

Predictably, after the successful bunt, the Giants walked Kemp to load the bases and brought in Javier Lopez to pitch to Andre Ethier.

On cue, Ethier did that, just like it was out of a script.

It would have been sad if everybody didn’t see it coming, but judging by the reaction on Twitter, we all did see it coming.

Sigh.

—–

The only possible positive thing that could have come out of this is Mattingly learning his lesson and swearing to stop doing this in the future.

“Neither one of those decisions I would look back and change,” Mattingly said after the game.

Welp, alrighty then.

“They have to pick between Matt and Andre, and if I can get Andre up there with the bases loaded, I’ll take it every day. He’s leading the league in RBI,” Mattingly said.

“I’m still giving two guys a chance, but I don’t even need a hit. I just need to get a ball in the air,” Mattingly said. “I have two guys that are basically leading the league in RBI and they have to take their pick.”

“I wouldn’t really change anything. We just have to execute, that’s all,” Mattingly said. “First and second nobody out we have to try to get runners over and get them in scoring position. With Mark [Ellis], I do it all the time.”

The Dodgers won yesterday’s game against the Braves 7 to 2, but the logistics of how they got that win is the interesting part.

The team finished the game with 29 AB, 2 K, and 15 H. That means for balls-in-play, the Dodgers finished 15-for-27 for a team BABIP of .556 on the night. Furthermore, they had only one extra-base hit, a double by James Loney, so they essentially singled the Braves to death.

You can’t get much more fortunate than that. And it doesn’t even include Chris Capuano managing to give up only one run in his seven innings pitched after allowing nine baserunners through five innings of work.

But wait, the Dodgers only had 29 AB? That can’t be right.

But it is. Only 14 AB resulted in outs, yet they still had to make 24 outs on the night, so how did the Dodgers do it?

A concoction of two sacrifice bunts by Capuano and one by Adam Kennedy, one sacrifice fly by Dee Gordon, one caught stealing a piece by Gordon and Juan Uribe, a TOOTBLAN each by Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, and grounding into two double plays.

His batting line currently sits at .250/.412/.400/.812, and he’s seeing a ridiculous 4.87 pitches per plate appearance, which would rank third in the MLB if he qualified (which most catchers don’t). Better yet, he’s throwing out 36% of baserunners, and I have minimal complaints about his blocking of balls, framing of pitches, and handling of the pitching staff.

Granted, none of these statistics have stabilized yet, so there’s ample time for him to crater or tail off, but so far? So good.

About the last thing Dodgers manager Don Mattingly wants is Loney doing anything that will change his batting swing, which is Loney’s tendency.

For example, after going 3-for-11 during the three-game series in Milwaukee, Loney struck out in his first at-bat in Houston on Friday night and Mattingly immediately noticed a mechanical difference.

“I figured he must have taken a roll of quarters and gone to the local batting cage and somebody he knows there changed him,” Mattingly said of Loney, who grew up in Houston. “I had [hitting coach Dave Hansen] pull up that at-bat and one from Milwaukee and told James to go look at them. When he came back and said, ‘My bad,’ that’s when I knew he changed something.”

Guys who constantly tinker with their swings on their own are nightmares for coaches, because you can never get locked in to which adjustments he is or isn’t using at any given moment.

This was probably supposed to be a throwaway quote, but it’s important information to me.

—–

Ned Colletti wants to sign Andre Ethier to an extension when new ownership rolls into town.

“You know, I’ve talked to them a little bit about it so it’s on the map already,” Colletti told SiriusXM Radio. “And when everything gets settled in and people get a chance to think about a lot of different things, that’ll be one of the topics we do bring up. I’d love to keep him here. Of course, it takes more than the organization and more than me to get it done. It takes a lot of different people and factions that have a say in it, but hopefully he can be here for a long time.

“He’s had a great start. Except for a little bit of a blip when he had a bad knee last year, he’s been a very consistent player for us and somebody who does provide some protection for Matt [Kemp]. A couple of years ago it was the other way around in the order. But he’s somebody that we count on and somebody that’s been here really his whole Major League career. He started with Oakland, but he’s been a Dodger ever since he showed up in the big leagues, and if we can keep it that way, it’s fine with me.”

Even though Chad Billingsley was roughed up Sunday after complaining of groin discomfort his previous start, Dodgers manager Don Mattingly said the groin was not the reason for Billingsley’s bad outing.

“I’m pretty sure of that,” Mattingly said. “I talked to Chad today and he felt like the biggest thing with him is that they wrapped it and I don’t know if he wasn’t comfortable with it, but he wasn’t striding as far.

Didn’t seem like he was hurt to me either, he just appeared to lose the zone in the second inning and it was all downhill from there.

—–

Todd Coffey is coming back, which means Josh Lindblom‘s roster spot is in jeopardy once again.

Coffey said he expects to pitch in Minor League rehab games Wednesday and Friday, then be activated on Sunday, when the Dodgers will face the same roster dilemma they had on April 14, when they put Coffey on the disabled list to make room for the activation of Ted Lilly.

Lindblom is pretty obviously the 7th inning guy at this point, and the Dodgers are winning, so why screw that up in favor of a fungible veteran? We’ll find out soon.

This is one of the few pieces in this 2012 Season Preview that I’m going to truly enjoy penning.

How could I not find joy in recapping one of the greatest seasons in franchise history, one of the handful of players on the Los Angeles Dodgers who has a ton of promise, and the man who should have won the 2011 NL MVP Award?

—–

Following a down 2010, many sought to have Matt Kemp shipped out of Los Angeles. Accusations of laziness, an inability to mentally comprehend the game, and caring more about a personal relationship than his on-the-field performance, plagued the Dodger center fielder. Heading into what was a make-or-break year in 2011, few stood behind Matty – mostly Dodger bloggers who skew analytical – and I’m proud to say I was one of those believers in The Bison.

You simply don’t give up on a 26-year-old who hits for power, can run the bases, and has a rocket arm, particularly at a time when his value was at its absolute lowest (and his luck on balls in play was the worst it had ever been, with a .295 BABIP that was well below his career .352 BABIP).

—–

Kemp backed up his supporters’ beliefs and proved all of the doubters wrong with a season that had him atop both the fWAR (8.7 – NL leader, 2nd in MLB) and rWAR (10.0 – MLB leader) leaderboards. Kemp mashed to the tune of a .324/.399/.586/.985 slash line with 39 long balls, 76 extra-base hits, 40 stolen bases in 51 attempts, a 171 wRC+, and a phenomenal .419 wOBA.

Perhaps most importantly, Matt showed refinement in the areas of his game that most affected the productivity of his 2010 campaign. He reduced his whiffs from 25.4% to 23.1% while simultaneously keeping his unintentional walk rate steady (7.3%/7.3%). Both his raw total of free passes and his walk rate increased (53 to 74 and 7.9% to 10.7%) due to 24 intentionally-awarded trips to first base. While many would discount this as simply a product of a horrid lineup around him, Matt’s dominant offensive season and ability to go yard in any situation also led to more four-ball, no-strike walks.

—–

The lineup around Kemp is yet another reason to praise him for the season-long Beast Mode that earned him the NL Hank Aaron Award as the top performer in the Senior Circuit. Matt crushed both lefties and righties (.341/.461/.682/1.143 & .319/.380/.560/.940, respectively), increased the amount of line drives he hit (20% to 23.2%), and continued to not make weak contact, as he popped up to an infielder only 2.2 percent of the time. All of this occurred with guys like Juan Uribe and James Loney providing “protection”.

—–

Defensive metrics over one season shouldn’t be taken as a picture of the player’s complete defensive skill set, and I’ll never be convinced that Matt’s 2010 season actually yielded a -27.5 UZR/150, but 2011 did see an improvement in fielding numbers, as he totaled a -4.7 UZR/150. With some conflicting numbers on defense (an average of a -9.5 UZR/150 over the last three seasons, including the one atrocious year), I believe that we can all agree on the basis of Matt’s glove work is this: he has a tremendous arm, great speed, and can run down a lot of balls despite the occasional bad route.

—–

As it stands, his 2010 season appears to be the outlier both defensively and overall, as he has produced two 5+ WAR seasons with the one down year in-between, as well as a pretty good 2008 season as a 23-year-old.

Questions regarding Kemp’s aptitude and intelligence were misguided from the start, and frankly were intellectually lazy as well, bordering on TMZ-ish analysis. These ideas ignored the numbers, which clearly pointed to where Matt’s game had fallen off between 2009 and 2010, and his 2011 performance cemented that he was more than just a big bag of tools.

When you’re a team full of over-the-hill or never-were veterans, a team that is offensively-challenged to the umpteenth degree beyond your dominating center fielder, and a team that has a broke owner, playing your top offensive prospect who doesn’t make a lot of money and has the most upside of any of your left field candidates is the obvious and wise choice.

Unfortunately, if you’re the Los Angeles Dodgers, and more to the point, Ned Colletti, you sign Juan Rivera for $4 million (with a $4 million club option for 2013) and confuse the whole baseball world yet again.

—–

Rivera – after being plucked off waivers following his release from the Toronto Blue Jays – stepped to the plate 246 times over 62 games and hit .274/.333/.406 with a .324 wOBA.

Now, you may be asking yourselves how anyone could be impressed with this, aside from the fact that it meant sayonara to Marcus Thames, Jay Gibbons, and Eugenio Velez. Well, Rivera’s impressive play, in the eyes of Colletti, is based on two things: a BABIP-fueled (.358) 34-game stretch in which he smacked the ball to the tune of a .322/.367/.496/.863 line, and 46 RBIs in those 62 games in Dodger Blue. In his last 28 games to end the campaign, Rivera’s slash line: .221/.297./308/.605 with a .236 BABIP. Rivera’s career batting average on balls in play is .283, but it has not exceeded .300 since 2006. He most certainly has a place on this team, and one we should all welcome, but that place is not making four million dollars and starting in left field every day.

Rivera performs well against lefties, to the tune of a .289/.335/.495/.830 line, and the Dodgers have a first baseman and a right fielder who can’t hit lefties to save their tails. A match made in baseball heaven this should be. Platoon Juan with both Andre Ethier and James Loney, leaving left field wide open for the club’s best offensive prospect, who has nothing left to prove in the minors: Jerry Sands.

Rivera has never been more than a 2.8 WAR player, and Sands has displayed power, a good eye at the plate, and the ability to get on-base. Plus, and this can’t be stressed enough: he’s got upside and is only 24 years of age. If either of their respective glove work is concerning (Rivera actually boats a career UZR/150 of 4.8 in left and Sands’ best work in the field in small sample sizes has been in right), Tony Gwynn, Jr. is always around to play late-inning caddy.

—–

The moral of the story is this: don’t sign Juan Rivera for four million bones to be a starter on your team, and don’t let Ned Colletti have control of the signings to begin with.

“A Tale of Two James Loneys” would be a great title for a novella, and it’s also the most apt description of Loney’s 2011 season.

Manning first in what was another season of “James Loney will finally hit for power and win a Gold Glove” vs. “James Loney will continue to under-perform, and by God we can do better”, Loney actually produced his best campaign to date. Unfortunately, it was still underwhelming, and even more unfortunately, it “earned” him another year and another chance in Dodger Blue.

—–

Between Opening Day and the end of May, Loney’s line looked like this: .249/.292/.325/.617 with nine extra-base hits in 212 plate appearances. From June 1st through the end of the season, Loney mashed (certainly by his standards) to the tune of a .311/.365/.470/.835 slash line with 34 extra-base hits in 370 plate appearances.

BABIP most definitely played a role, as a .337 mark helped to fuel the latter portion of James’ season, while a .263 BABIP accompanied Loney’s early season putridness (it may not be a word, but it’s as accurate a description as they come). Loney’s career batting average on balls in play is .311, so in short, he wasn’t as bad or as good as his two seasons would indicate.

That being said, all evidence points to James being more the first guy than the second half slugger.

Prior to 2011, James had put up declining numbers across the board. A two-year decline in OBP (.357/.329), BB% (10.7%/8.0%), and homers (13/10) went hand-in-hand with a four-year downward spiral in both SLG% (.538/.434/.399/.395) and wOBA (.389/.333/.332/.315), and a two-year increase in K% (10.4%/14.7%). Loney did cut down on his whiffs last year (11.5%), but he also drew even less walks (7.2%). Furthermore, since his career year in regards to value was accompanied by a .288/.339/.416 line with a .329 wOBA, .128 ISO, and 43 extra-base hits as an everyday first baseman, his status on the squad has to be in doubt.

With the leather, James had his best season, posting a 5.6 UZR/150, though for his career he has barely been an average glove man (0.1 UZR/150). Loney has never put up a WAR greater than the 2.3 he managed in ’11, and he’s averaged barely a 1.4 WAR in his six seasons in The Show (four full seasons).

—–

Which James Loney will grace us with his presence this year, I can’t predict with 100% certainty. However, based on the abundance of data we have at our disposal (namely over 3000 career plate appearances), it is safe to say he’ll continue to not hit for power, not draw walks, and generally underwhelm immensely at the plate, while being atrocious against southpaws (.213/.254/.307/.561 in 2011, .252/.309/.368/.677 career), as he enters his age 28 season.

If Don Mattingly is wise, he’ll platoon Juan Rivera with Loney at first, move Andre Ethier to left field, and play Jerry Sands everyday in right.

MLB Trade Rumorsprojected Ethier to clock in at $10.7 million and Loney at $6.5 million, making their knowledge of the process disturbingly accurate.

—

Considering that Ethier is coming off the worst season in his career, it doesn’t seem all that absurd that he gets a raise just below $2 million, as opposed to a larger bump around the $12-13 million mark. Is he worth it? Sure (~3 WAR), but at this point he’s certainly not going to be clocking in at bargain bin prices.

As for Loney, I find it hard to believe he could get a better deal on the open market. He had his best offensive season as a full time regular and was still only worth around 2 WAR. While he would certainly be worth the contract in terms of value (probably), I would imagine he would find it difficult to get the $8-10 million he would need in order to actually want to be non-tendered at this stage in the off-season.

=====

I don’t have much problem with the actual arbitration salaries, because they’re both standard and about in line with their value. Once again, the real issue at hand is the use of resources.

The Dodgers will have spent around $55 million in 2012 payroll during this off-season, including $35 million on players not named Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw. For 2013, the Dodgers have committed over $105 million already, including $46 million this off-season and $24 million of that chunk on players not named Kemp.

At this point, I honestly have to wonder why the Dodgers couldn’t have fit Prince Fielder into the equation.

I ruled him out early in the off-season because I assumed (incorrectly) that the Dodgers had no money to spend beyond 2012 due to the contract potentially hamstringing the team’s value. However, the Dodgers have plainly spent a ton of money in 2012 and beyond, so this appears to be nothing more than another poor use of resources. If the Dodgers are going to allow such money to be spent, I’m unclear as to how spending it on a bunch of mediocre players will make the franchise more well off in terms of fan support, payroll flexibility, and franchise value than getting a marquee talent.

It just seems absurd that the Dodgers will fail to get an impact player out of the gigantic chunk of money they have spent in the 2012 off-season by using the mantra that it’s impossible when their actions clearly show otherwise.

On December 12th, the Los Angeles Dodgerstendered contracts to a trio of arbitration eligible players: Clayton Kershaw, Andre Ethier, and James Loney. However, they elected to not tender a contract to Hong Chih Kuo. The other two arbitration eligible players, Matt Kemp and Tony Gwynn Jr., were signed to extensions earlier.

—–

According to MLB Trade Rumors, the projected arbitration salaries for the quartet were $10.7 million for Ethier, $8.4 million for Kershaw, $6.5 million for Loney, and $2.5 million for Kuo.

Ned Colletti made the right decision on all four, as Ethier, Kershaw, and Loney all project to be worth more than their arbitration numbers, and Kuo’s injury history and anxiety disorder are reason enough to not want to pay a premium.

Los Angeles Times: I covered the adventures of James Loneybefore, but according to the California Highway Patrol, his night was even more ridiculous than TMZ reported.

Loney sideswiped three cars on the 101 Freeway in Sherman Oaks, stopped in the fast lane, passed out, then awakened and tried to flee the scene, only to crash again, said Leland Tang, a spokesman for the California Highway Patrol.

Alrighty then.

In all seriousness, it does seem like it could get significantly worse, as the tests haven’t come back yet.

Tang said officers extracted a blood sample to test for drugs and alcohol but that the test results were not yet available. The city attorney’s office is investigating the incident and deciding whether to file criminal charges.

Could end up being quite bad.

ESPN: Then again, James Loney explained to Tony Jackson how it’s just all a big misunderstanding.

—–

Dodger Thoughts: Thank god Jon Weisman decided to break down the TV rights ruling because I was starting to get a headache trying to keep up with Bill Shaikin on Twitter.